Zach Line is a pretty interesting player. I think he should be a 4th/5th rounder - he has had 3 1000 yd rushing seasons. I remember alot of Robert Turbin hype last year and I think Line is better than him. Should be interesting to see how Line measures up at the combine and senior bowl.

Zach Line is a pretty interesting player. I think he should be a 4th/5th rounder - he has had 3 1000 yd rushing seasons. I remember alot of Robert Turbin hype last year and I think Line is better than him. Should be interesting to see how Line measures up at the combine and senior bowl.

I half-wanted to combine it with a Matt Forte comparison based on some other aspects of his game, but physically, he looks a lot like Eddie George when he's running. He surprised me with how sudden and fluid he is for a big back, and he does exactly what you want a big back to do - he breaks a ton of tackles and doesn't hesitate to lower his shoulders and plow through trash. I also think he looks really good catching screen passes. He's definitely an intriguing prospect to me, and definitely someone I'll be keeping an eye on throughout the process. Shades of LeGarrett Blount, too. The Toby Gerhart comparison is going to be the obvious one for some people to make, but without saying which one is "better," part of me suspects Zach Line might have a leg up on him as a pure athlete.

Zach Line is a pretty interesting player. I think he should be a 4th/5th rounder - he has had 3 1000 yd rushing seasons. I remember alot of Robert Turbin hype last year and I think Line is better than him. Should be interesting to see how Line measures up at the combine and senior bowl.

Line has great hands and can pass protect, but he's not runner Turbin is.

Gerhart is the best comp. But I think Line is a bit shiftier, whereas Gerhart is more of a downhill, straightline type.

Gerhart is the best comp. But I think Line is a bit shiftier, whereas Gerhart is more of a downhill, straightline type.

So I don't just come off as a ****-stirrer, I'm going to explain.

Line looks a lot shiftier to me. Comparing him to Gerhart seems like nothing over and above just looking at their profiles. And I feel like I should explain this because I'm not taking you to simply be saying "white RB = white RB," because obviously they look kind of physically similar; they do have similar builds. But it's like comparing AJ Green to Randy Moss. Both great players, physically similar... but they do not play the same way.

I mean, you say it yourself - "Line is a bit shiftier, while Gerhart is more of a downhill, strightline type." That's a huuuuuuge difference. While both of them are tough runners, Line is much more explosive - he moves his feet much more quickly, he changes direction more quickly, and while he breaks a lot of tackles, he also makes more defenders straight-up miss than Gerhart ever has. He also looks much more comfortable catching passes. That's no insult to Gerhart - what Gerhart has going is his ability to absorb hits. More than anything, that's what I always noticed about him. Not just his ability to break tackles, or outrun anyone, but literally to just take a hit and keep going. You watch his college tape, and over and over again you see Gerhart get trucked, gain his balance with one or two steps and charge forward again. Line runs a lot less like a renegade bumper car. That's why I wanted to throw out the Forte comparison, too - Forte's a bigger back himself, but he, like I want to say with Line, has an ability to move really subtly; they have a gliding element to their game that Gerhart just doesn't have. All big running backs are going to have some things in common, you've just got to reach a little deeper than how alike they'd look as a fathead.

I can see some Forte with his footwork and shiftiness, but Line is a 4.55-4.6 guy. Forte is 4.44.

David Fluellen (Toledo) resembles Matt Forte more than Zach Line does.

This could well be true, but I feel like I ought to point out that no one really thought of Forte as a blazer before the draft, and he's definitely one of those guys whose 40 time made teams feel a lot better about him as a prospect. You never really know what a guy will run until he runs at the combine.

Quote:

Originally Posted by bhaarat316

Jerome Bettis, when he was skinny-ish.

For what it's worth, I'll just throw it out there that this crossed my mind, too. But you don't want to compare a prospect with too many all-time great running backs. ;-)

Also, there's really no one who really "runs like Jerome Bettis." Bettis is one of the most unique players the NFL has ever seen. But he does have really quick feet for how big he is.

I think baldwin was stiffer in the hips and struggled to changed directions more than Davis will at the next level. Im skeptical that davis will ever become a colston like player but watching colston for years i think that he has that potential because of how he adjusts to balls in the air, his adeptness at double moves, and his YAC and big play flair. With the right QB i think that he'll have more potential than the saint's pick last year nick toon or browns receiver Greg Little.

with chris harper--

Harper is more of a true wide receiver than reece was at washington who was more of a seam route deep threat IMO. He runs better underneath routes like outs and comebacks that i rarely observed from reece at washington or in oakland. And he's built more like anquan boldin than a full back like reece.

bailey--

I can tell you now that bailey is faster than lance moore who relies on exploitation of underneath zones and spectacular hands than pure down field ability to beat defenses deep.

Ryan Broyles was/is more of an inside slot guy than pure split end.

Antonio brown is another very apt comparison. I can definitely see that one as dead on though.

I think baldwin was stiffer in the hips and struggled to changed directions more than Davis will at the next level. Im skeptical that davis will ever become a colston like player but watching colston for years i think that he has that potential because of how he adjusts to balls in the air, his adeptness at double moves, and his YAC and big play flair. With the right QB i think that he'll have more potential than the saint's pick last year nick toon or browns receiver Greg Little.

with chris harper--

Harper is more of a true wide receiver than reece was at washington who was more of a seam route deep threat IMO. He runs better underneath routes like outs and comebacks that i rarely observed from reece at washington or in oakland. And he's built more like anquan boldin than a full back like reece.

bailey--

I can tell you now that bailey is faster than lance moore who relies on exploitation of underneath zones and spectacular hands than pure down field ability to beat defenses deep.

Ryan Broyles was/is more of an inside slot guy than pure split end.

Antonio brown is another very apt comparison. I can definitely see that one as dead on though.

I haven't seen consistent ball skills from Davis like Colston.

I like the Boldin comp. I used Reece because they're similar in size and speed. Harper could probably succeed at RB as Reece has.

I compare Bailey to Moore because of his slipperyness and fluidness running routes. Same with Broyles. Bailey definitely a better downfield threat than Broyles. Those two would be the low-end comp with Antonio Brown being his ceiling.

I know I'm going to get a ton of flak for this, but I see a lot of Tim Brown in Marqise Lee. They have a similar build with a lot of size in their shoulders, both have very good speed and make plays with the ball in their hands.

Even the way Lee moves with the ball in his hands reminds me of Brown.

I know I'm going to get a ton of flak for this, but I see a lot of Tim Brown in Marqise Lee. They have a similar build with a lot of size in their shoulders, both have very good speed and make plays with the ball in their hands.

Even the way Lee moves with the ball in his hands reminds me of Brown.

You won't get too much flack basically because Brown was before most people's time around here.